Re: That old Odin scenario ...

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "jouppe" <jouppe@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, george knysh <gknysh@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > --- tgpedersen <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I would disagree. If we theoretically allow multi-ethnic and
> > > multi-lingual areas, we could identify (Proto-Proto-!) Slavs
> > > with the farmers in Zarubyntsi and Przeworsk,
> >
> > ****GK: Proto-proto etc.. Slavs cannot be shown to
> > have spoken a Slavic language, or to have been Slavs.
> > Add enough protos,and you're back to PIE and
> > substrates.
> - - - - - - - -
> "Proto-proto-Slavic" sounds like Proto-Balto-Slavic to me. Would you
> Torsten refer to something more recent than Proto-Balto-Slavic or
> are you challenging the validity of that node?

Proto- is the last unified stage of a language family. Proto-Proto-
was just meant to represent some ancestor of that. In this case, given
that Proto-Slavic was spoken in the Kiev culture, the ancestor
language of that, spoken in Przeworsk and Zarubintsy, would be
Proto-Proto-Slavic (add Proto-'s according to how many stages one
needs to posit). On the question of when Eastern and Western Baltic
split off, Okulicz says one thing, Gol/a,b another, and George
probably a third thing; I don't know enough yet to have an opinion on
that.



Torsten